You can hear about the incredible mitochondria similarities between the Euglenids and the Dinoflagellates here (or you can see the paper here), beginning at the [28:30] mark. It is well worth a listen for you will learn that these distant mitochondria have in common: polycistronic transcription, reduced ribosomal RNA, universal import of tRNAs, use of the enzyme tRNA-Met formyl-transferase, trans-splicing, extensive RNA editing and 3’ polyadenylation and polyuridylylation. Here is how the evolutionist describes it at the [32.50] mark:
What is here common is total mayhem of the organellar genome—breakdown. Either you have very complicated structure in the kinetoplastids, and I will talk a little bit later on that, or, you have even more complicated, this is totally crazy, this was published last year, or actually two years ago in Science. This appears that these diplonemida have everything! They manage their organellar genome in such a sophisticated way, that is still beyond my comprehension.
Then we have apicomplexans plasmodium that have some small, short, linear molecules, and all genes from the mitochondria of malaria have been exported into the nucleus. There are just three, actually two even fused together, but they are in different sequence contexts, they are in fragments. So apparently they have to be spliced together. Enormous effort have to be invested just to produce two or three genes. And in dinoflagellates it’s even worse. The genes are again split into fragments—pieces are just like you would take scissors and cut them and paste them together. Then, on top of that, the transcripts are edited. So you need a vast range of proteins that perform these editings. And these editings are complex. So you have guanines changed to adenines, uridines changed to cytosines, cytosines in other positions changed to uridines. So you have five or six different changes of the given base, then you look on the level of amino acids, because you would expect that all this effort is made in order to change the amino acid, and in some cases the amino acid is not changed. So it’s like they do it for fun. And that is extreme in both of these groups.
It doesn’t make any sense on evolution not only because these are highly unique designs, but they then appear repeatedly, in otherwise very distant species. This is not what evolution expected and this is far beyond any level of evolutionary noise. Nor will the oft-used gene transfer explanation work in this case. This is an instance of massive convergence that makes no sense on evolution.
We saw that evolutionists needed the term “Recurrent evolution” to explain repeated convergence. Now evolutionists are calling these “totally crazy” arrangements: “Corresponding evolutionary histories” or “Cascades of convergent evolution.”
Evolution is not merely a scientific theory. If that were the case it would have been discarded long ago. Evolution is a dogma. That is why evolutionists make extreme truth claims. Rather than tentative, scientific, explanations of the evidence, evolutionists insist that their idea is a fact. A fact every bit as much as gravity or the fact that the Earth is round. It is beyond all reasonable doubt, they insist.
To say this is a misrepresentation of the science is putting it lightly. Evolution has been mandated by religious thought for centuries and it is a corruption of science. With evolution, we have lost the ability to reason scientifically.
Religion drives science, and it matters.